PDA

View Full Version : Difference between 40-150mm lens between E-500 and E-510


navin
8th January 2008, 03:45 PM
Does anyone know what's the difference between the kit lens that came with E-500 last year and the one they are selling now with E-510.

I got the E-510 with one kit lens package and then brought a used 40-150mm lens from a E-500 user. Other than the widest aperture opening of f3.5 on the E-500 lens and 4.0 on the E-510 lens and the ED designation on the newer lens, I can't tell what's the difference.

I have not been able to physically look at the lens that comes with E-510 to see if it's of smaller size and lower weight.

Garrie
8th January 2008, 04:39 PM
The "old" 40 - 150mm is supposed to be a little sharper but is deffo brighter f3.5 wide open where as the new one is f4, which you already know :)

The difference in size in amazing, I'll try and take a shot of them side by side tonight as I have both. I've kept the old one for my E510 and gave Susan the new one for her E500. I was shocked how small the new 40-150 is :eek:

Will eventually get round to doing some test shots with both lenses.

Hope this helps
Garrie

PeterD
8th January 2008, 04:42 PM
The "old" 40 - 150mm is supposed to be a little sharper but is deffo brighter f3.5 wide open where as the new one is f4, which you already know :)

The difference in size in amazing, I'll try and take a shot of them side by side tonight as I have both. I've kept the old one for my E510 and gave Susan the new one for her E500. I was shocked how small the new 40-150 is :eek:

Will eventually get round to doing some test shots with both lenses.

Hope this helps
Garrie

What a generous chap you are Garrie. I think I might have kept the new lens;)

PeterD

Garrie
8th January 2008, 04:43 PM
damn right heehee :p

Susan really wants the 70 - 300 anyways :eek:

navin - I should be able to get some pics up in an hour or so if you wanna check back..

navin
8th January 2008, 05:36 PM
damn right heehee :p

Susan really wants the 70 - 300 anyways :eek:

navin - I should be able to get some pics up in an hour or so if you wanna check back..

Great, thanks a lot !!
It will help me visualize why some reviews say the lens is small and light, because I did not find that with the lens that came with E-500, but brought it anyway for it's wider aperture. I found the lens to be heavy, almost as if it would take the camera's front panel off with it, if I did not hold it while taking shots.

Garrie
8th January 2008, 06:00 PM
excuse my pants close up shots, never been good at these type of shots plus I'm kinda in a hurry to get ready and watch Rangers

http://www.onemileahead.co.uk/lens/P1081498.JPG
http://www.onemileahead.co.uk/lens/P1081499.JPG
http://www.onemileahead.co.uk/lens/P1081500.JPG
http://www.onemileahead.co.uk/lens/P1081502.JPG

Any other pics you need give us a shout.

The new 40 - 150 is very very light, I don't like the feel of it, much prefer the older one.

Cheers
Garrie

theMusicMan
8th January 2008, 06:21 PM
I actually prefer the older one too, though the new one is incredibly small and convenient for carrying 'in ones pocket' :)

Thanks for the pics Garrie.

navin
8th January 2008, 06:25 PM
excuse my pants close up shots, never been good at these type of shots plus I'm kinda in a hurry to get ready and watch Rangers


Thanks a lot of Garrie !!
Wow, yes, now I know why they wrote you can almost carry the lens in your pant pocket...it's a good size difference.
I guess one has to choose between size/weight and wider aperture.
I already brought the older one, so keeping it. Did not find anyone selling the new one here in Canada on used goods forums.

Also found this additional info on the new lens....so this makes the old lens atleast 200 grams heavier and it also has a rotating mount, which makes using it with polarizing filter difficult.
"Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4.0–5.6 is the lightest (220g) and smallest lens in its class*, and boasts the shortest minimum shooting distance (0.9m). "

arbib
8th April 2008, 09:56 PM
I also had the chose between the MK2 and MK1,..I got the older MK1. about 1 stop faster, and a better build quality too. Mount and body...Wish it focused to a bit closer though...no biggy...

I am used to a 70-300 f/4-5.6 on my previous DSLR 1.6 crop. And the older ZD MK1 is still smaller and faster..AND SHARPER too. Both are good lens's..If weight and size is a concern...the ZD MK2 will deliver as well.

DTD
9th April 2008, 07:10 AM
I actually prefer the older one too, though the new one is incredibly small and convenient for carrying 'in ones pocket'

I'd agree, but if I had the new one I wouldn't swap it for my old one they're both good kit lenses.

Jim Ford
9th April 2008, 02:37 PM
excuse my pants close up shots, never been good at these type of shots

Oh - I was quite expecting HDR images!
;^)

Jim

Garrie
22nd April 2008, 09:23 PM
Oh - I was quite expecting HDR images!
;^)

Jim

One can read that in several ways, I'm hoping i'm not reading it in a negative way :confused: